Updated (January, 2013): Compare the Olympus TG-320 vs Panasonic Lumix FT25

vs

     
 

Reasons to buy the Panasonic Lumix FT20

Wide angle
Wide angle lens
25 mm
Size
Really small
Super compact 101x58x19 mm
Panorama
In-camera panoramas
Stitches together multiple photos into a panorama
Thickness
Thin
0.7"
 

Reasons to buy the Olympus Tough TG-320

Panorama
In-camera panoramas
Stitches together multiple photos into a panorama
3D
Takes 3D photos
View photos in 3D on 3D televisions
Macro focus
Great macro
3 cm
 
Differences | Recommendations | Cast your vote | Similarities | Competitors | Appearance | Discussion

differences

Advantages of the Olympus TG-320

Report a correction
3D Takes 3D photos Yes vs No
Help
Combines multiple photos into a 3D image
Aperture Wider aperture f/3.5 vs f/3.9
Help
At its widest zoom, the TG-320's lens captures marginally more light (0.3 f-stops)
Macro focus Better macro capability 3 cm vs 5 cm
Help
Focus on subjects 40% closer to the lens
Olympus TG-320 Learn more about
the Olympus TG-320

Advantages of the Panasonic FT20

Report a correction
Wide angle Better wide angle 25 mm vs 28 mm
Help
More than 10% better wide angle
Battery life Significantly longer battery life 260 shots vs 150 shots
Help
More than 70% more shots per battery charge
Size Smaller 101x58x19 mm vs 96x63x23 mm
Help
Around 20% smaller
Image stabilization Better image stabilization Lens vs Sensor shift
Help
Less risk of blur
Thickness Thinner 0.7" vs 0.9"
Help
Around 20% thinner
Weight Slightly lighter 142 g vs 155 g
Help
Around 10% lighter
Longest exposure Slightly longer exposures 8s vs 4s
Help
2x longer exposures
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FT20 Learn more about
the Panasonic FT20
vs

recommendations

Which camera do we recommend? Relative to the best recent waterproof cameras, and ignoring price

Olympus TG-320 Olympus Tough TG-320 67
Retailer
    Style
      Color
        You save

        vs

        68 Panasonic Lumix FT20 Panasonic Lumix DMC-FT20

        similarities

        Compared to recent compacts

        Common Strengths Common Weaknesses
        Panorama In-camera panoramas Help
        Stitches together multiple photos into a panorama
        Waterproof Waterproof Help
        Great at the beach
        Thickness Thin Help
        TG-320:0.9"
        FT20:0.7"
        Sensor type Lower-end sensor types Help
        CCD
        Supports RAW No RAW support Help
        Less editing fidelity
        HDR Neither has in-camera HDR Help
        You could do HDR manually
        Continuous shooting Slow continuous shooting Help
        TG-320:0.6 fps
        FT20:1.3 fps
        Light sensitivity Poor maximum light sensitivity Help
        1,600 ISO
        Screen resolution Low resolution screens Help
        230k dots
        Screen size Very small screens Help
        2.7"
        Movie format Both shoot high resolution HD movies Help
        720p @ 30fps
        Aperture Very narrow widest aperture size Help
        TG-320:f/3.5
        FT20:f/3.9
        Zoom Poor zoom Help
        TG-320:3.6x
        FT20:4x

        Compared to recent waterproof cameras

        Common Strengths Common Weaknesses
        Built-in flash Each has a built-in flash Help
        Usually standard
        Size Fairly small Help
        TG-320:96x63x23 mm
        FT20:101x58x19 mm
        Image stabilization Good image stabilization Help
        TG-320:Sensor shift
        FT20:Lens
        GPS No built-in GPS Help
        Missing geo-tagging
        External mic jack Neither has an external mic jack Help
        Limited to the in-camera mic
        High-speed framerate No high speed movie support Help
        Not supported
        Wide angle Poor wide angle Help
        TG-320:28 mm
        FT20:25 mm

        competitors

        Shared Competitors

        Advantages

        Disadvantages

        Panasonic Lumix FT25

        Panasonic Lumix FT25

        Waterproof

        $172

        Longest exposure Much longer exposures
        Macro focus Slightly worse macro focusing
        Aperture Has a slightly narrower aperture
        Fujifilm FinePix XP50

        Fujifilm FinePix XP50

        Waterproof

        $189

        Movie format Records higher quality movies
        Sensor type Has a CMOS-family sensor
        Thickness Is thicker
        Weight Is slightly heavier
        Nikon Coolpix S32

        Nikon Coolpix S32

        Waterproof

        $107 - $109

        Movie format Records higher quality movies
        Sensor type Has a CMOS-family sensor
        Thickness Is thicker
        Weight Is slightly heavier
        Olympus TG-620

        Olympus TG-620

        Waterproof

        $220

        Movie format Records higher quality movies
        Screen size Has a slightly larger screen
        Size Is slightly larger
        Wide angle Has a slightly narrower wide angle lens
        Nikon Coolpix AW100

        Nikon Coolpix AW100

        Waterproof

        $250

        Movie format Records higher quality movies
        Screen size Has a slightly larger screen
        Weight Is slightly heavier
        Size Is slightly larger
        Fujifilm FinePix XP60

        Fujifilm FinePix XP60

        Waterproof

        $175

        Movie format Records higher quality movies
        Light sensitivity Slightly higher maximum light sensitivity
        Thickness Is thicker
        Weight Is slightly heavier
        Olympus Stylus Tough TG-2 iHS

        Olympus Stylus Tough TG-2 iHS

        Waterproof

        $339

        Aperture Has a much wider aperture
        Movie format Records higher quality movies
        Lowest price Is slightly more expensive
        Thickness Is thicker

        Olympus TG-320 Competitors

        Advantages

        Disadvantages

        Olympus TG-310

        Olympus TG310

        Waterproof

        $204

        Continuous shooting Shoots faster
        Macro focus Better macro capability
        3D Doesn't take 3D photos
        Panorama Lacks in-camera panoramic stitching
        Olympus TG-610

        Olympus TG-610

        Waterproof

        $276

        Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
        Screen size Larger screen
        3D Doesn't take 3D photos
        Aperture Narrower aperture
        Olympus mju Tough 3000

        Olympus mju Tough 3000

        Waterproof

        Macro focus Better macro capability
        3D Doesn't take 3D photos
        Panorama Lacks in-camera panoramic stitching
        Olympus Tough TG-830 iHS

        Olympus Tough TG-830 iHS

        Waterproof

        $309

        Movie format Higher resolution movies
        High-speed framerate Records high-speed movies
        3D Doesn't take 3D photos
        Size Significantly larger

        Panasonic Lumix DMC-FT20 Competitors

        Advantages

        Disadvantages

        Panasonic Lumix DMC-FT4

        Panasonic Lumix FT4

        Waterproof

        3D Takes 3D photos
        Aperture Wider aperture
        Size Significantly larger
        Wide angle Worse wide angle
        Panasonic Lumix DMC-FT2

        Panasonic Lumix DMC-FT2

        Waterproof

        Aperture Wider aperture
        Longest exposure Much longer exposures
        Panorama Lacks in-camera panoramic stitching
        Wide angle Worse wide angle
        Panasonic Lumix DMC-FT3

        Panasonic Lumix DMC-FT3

        Waterproof

        $412

        3D Takes 3D photos
        Aperture Wider aperture
        Size Significantly larger
        Panorama Lacks in-camera panoramic stitching
        Sony Cyber-shot DSC-TX20

        Sony Cyber-shot DSC-TX20

        Waterproof

        $209

        Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
        3D Takes 3D photos
        Battery life Slightly shorter battery life
        Longest exposure Slightly shorter max exposures

        appearance

        Olympus TG-320 Panasonic Lumix DMC-FT20
        Olympus TG-320 Panasonic Lumix DMC-FT20
        Olympus TG-320 Panasonic Lumix DMC-FT20

        discussion

        Olympus TG-320
        Tough TG-320
        Olympus

        Report a correction
        Panasonic Lumix DMC-FT20
        Lumix FT20
        Panasonic

        Report a correction

        Showing 0 comments